At 11:27 AM 10/15/96 GMT, Dennis Handly wrote:
>Stan Sieler ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
/SNIP
>
>No, COBOLII/iX only supports entry points for subprograms.
>I never got around to doing it for the outer block.
>
>: Personally, I favor lobbying HP to enhance Pascal/iX to support
>: entrypoints...but I doubt it will ever happen.
>
>Right.  I've said many times for these SRs that program secondary entry
>points are "an obsolete user interface technology".  The new method is like
>HP-UX and POSIX, using INFO and PARM.

I agree with Stan, secondary entry points are indeed a useful programming
technique.  They are certainly more 'self-documenting' than PARM or INFO
parameters.  Perhaps it is HP-UX and POSIX which are missing the opportunity.
Furthermore, this feature was missing from the RISK-based compilers *BEFORE*
POSIX was considered for MPE!  How can the lack of a feature that pre-dates
POSIX now be explained away because of a technique in POSIX?  Perhaps this
is a simple way to have an excuse for either an unpopular decision or an
oversight...  Sorry, I don't buy it.  The first response about why entry
points never made it into COBOL/iX is probably the correct reason as oppose
to blaming it on 'an obsolete user interface...'.

Besides, when did HP ever stopped differentiating their product in the
market place?  Perhaps features such as this are considered 'obsolete' until
the UNIX world 'discovers'/'wants' them...?

Given that HP is the 'keeper of the keys' I guess we're still expected to
graciously accept what we're given, for whatever reason, and be happy about
the decisions that were made because someone else knows best....  Obviously
no matter how many SRs are submitted, you've made your decision about
supporting customers' needs on this issue.

/jf